You might have almost had points here if you weren't just building assumption after assumption on top of each other with easy to point out failures within each one.
ya, called forecasting or modeling.
are you not college educated?
"assumptions bad" sounds high school level,
I'm going to start on point 2 since I don't want to dig through data to disprove a halalcow, and the phrase 'many' is so vague as to be basically irrelevant. You seem to be under the implicit assumption that the only reason people are within the USA is quality of life/optimism over quality of life and not due to patriotism, inability to leave, unawareness of the outside world, or awareness of how good things are, relatively speaking, within the Western world.
ya, people come here because the quality of life was better: founding stock, irish famine-ellis island immigrants, cuban refugees or now the hispanics. Patriotism/Nationalism is brainwashing. If the quality of life is poor, no one is gonna be patriotic/nationalistic.
This ties directly into your point 3, which has the assumption that quality of life will equalize around the world, something I find odd considering your white supremacist ideas. If that were the case, then would majority black areas not always be inferior? Furthermore, as media has become and will probably stay a relatively easy to transmit luxury through the Internet, would "culture" eventually not become something that can be accessed basically anywhere?
Even the Syrian refugees have smartphones. By quality of life, I mean consumer technology. Other aspects of quality of life including culture or crime rate WILL depend on the population's DNA. This will be a huge problem for America was we're importing statistically more dangerous people.
Finally, your fourth point depends on arbitrary start and end dates for slavery (which has been written about in some capacity since writing existed, and almost undoubtedly existed since the concept of labor existed), communism (which you seem to have just described as the lifespan of the Soviet Union from the October Revolution onwards and not regarded the pseudocommunist ideas that have been floating around since the 1500's and the fact that Marxism was not a brand new idea when Lenin was alive, nor the existence of pseudocommunist states such as North Korea to this day) diversity/racial and civil rights (which could be argued to go back to the Magna Carta at least).
In short, this was, by your standards, an actually intellectually almost sound post, but it falls apart under your own rules and ideas.
Slavery became a huge issue with the US const 1789 (3/5ths, 10A) and affected US domestic policy as America expanded west and more states had to be incorporated which affected the balance of power in Congress. Eventually this caused the nation to split.
Marxism was tried as best as possible in the USSR and it was the first generation (silent generation) born after the revolution that ended the system.
There is a time limit to social change or policy. If issues cannot be resolved within the 1 human life time (70-80ys), people get fed up. We're entering a similar situation now with diversity.
Diversity has been tried for 56 years and it's caused huge problems like white flight and political correctness. More and More people are becoming anti diversity every day.
